On the subject of rational thinking! Conspiracy theorists!?

If you believe something is evidence... ask yourself is this really proof? Is this scientific proof? Would this hold up in court? Or is it just a photo that could be faked? An idea that could be misrepresented? Or information that is just hearsay?

Ask yourself these questions... Do you like the concept of being innocent until PROVEN guilty? Then RESPECT IT.

I don't believe that the government did it. I believe that the government had knowledge of the event in advance then decided for political reasons to not only allow it, but to take steps to ensure the mission's success.

I do believe that explosives, mainly thermite, were placed in all three buildings and after the impacts of the and demolition of the first two towers, i believe that a decision was made to blow the 3 building because events took place that prevented the last plane from hitting its target and they would be unable to remove the explosives unnoticed.

Although I have no evidence to support this, i firmly believe, until other facts may be obtained, that the party responsible for actually physically installing the explosives would most likely be contractors working in conjunction with the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA is the only US Government agency that is well known for its criminal activities. Murder, trafficking of weapons and drugs to aiding and training of terrorist groups abroad.

There is tons of actual evidence to support the notion of controlled demolition. From photos of support beams being cut off at a downward angle to allow them to collapse in on themselves to the pools of molten lava forming in the lower levels that was reported by rescue wich is a known happening of termite detonations.

But all of that set aside.. I'm willing to judge the events based solely on one event. On the morning of 9/11 our nation's air defenses were crippled. I believe intentionally. On the exact day and the exact time, airplanes were being used as missles to attack this nation, NORAD, or air defences, was running simulations of airplanes being used as missles. When air traffic controllers were calling in reports of hijacked aircraft, NORAD controllers had no idea that they were actual reports rather than just part of the simulation. They have the audio recording where you can hear the NORAD dispatchers saying.. "Is this real world or is this simulation"..

No fighters were ever launched to intercept these hijacked aircraft. On any other day, at any other time, Air Forces would have be in the air, on the wing of those airliners attempting to make radio contact and then visual contact.. and it at any time they thought those aircraft were a threat they would have been taken down by force.

I find such coincidences hard to swallow - but I find it a lot easier to explain many of them by assuming the terrorists weren't the bumbling fools that they were made out to be after the fact. A well planned operation, possibly with some assistance of foreign intelligence, or a few domestic traitors, could have found out about the massive air maneuvers that day.

I don't see the advantage of bringing the towers down after they were hit. Who truly benefited from this and how? I realize defense contractors made money off the 'war on terror' - but do you really think they could have pulled this off? Aren't there easier ways for them to fan the flames? If George Bush had direct ties to this, don't you think he would have better positioned himself on an aircraft carrier looking cool rather than reading about goats to school children ffs?

I'm sorry, I don't buy the zeitgeist stuff at all. They run through some great talking points and do a great job of rapidly connecting lots of dots while playing dramatic music - but they skim over the material even faster than the ancient aliens theorists.

I look more to who would benefit from a controlled demolition to take the building down. I realize the owner (Silverstein?) got a lot of insurance, but he couldn't know that was going to pay out beforehand. On top of that, he couldn't orchestrate the entire day, and if the day was orchestrated by the 'Illuminati' (smirk) then they certainly wouldn't have wanted him to bring the buildings down because that has caused all sorts of suspicions they wouldn't have wanted. Outside of the owner, there was no gain in bringing the buildings down.

That was a ghastly audio - I couldn't stomach it - after 5 minutes it had to go.

I think the whole basis of conspiracy theories rests on the assumption that people can keep secrets. Not only has that not been true historically, but nowadays with the internet available, information leaks everywhere, so it is even more unrealistic in today's world. People can't keep secrets. The more people involved, and the longer the time lapse, the more unlikely a secret will be sustained as such.

I think of it as paranoia. Maybe religious people are used to believing impossible things, but I cannot.

Well said... another factor besides the eroding institute of secrecy... is the eroding institute of credible evidence. A photograph 60 years ago was pretty solid evidence. Today... photographs AND video can be manipulated and shopped in minutes reducing credibility. This will only continue.

As well.. shouldn't there be many more sources than one for photographs in today's age if anything spooky happens.